Perhaps That Explains It


Over the past couple of weeks, the Harvey Weinstein scandal has been the topic of so many articles and posts it’s almost mind-boggling. People are reading these articles to find out which of their favorite starlets degraded themselves to this person. Others read it in morbid fascination, wondering how the “casting couch” of the past is still in use in this modern, “enlightened” day of where feminism and the self-proclaimed Hollywood equality supposedly banned such behavior.

I, on the other hand, have another take on this episode of “Hollywood Depravity,” although it requires that I put on the armchair psychologist hat.

It is no secret in Hollywood that Weinstein was a predator. Comedians made references in their routines, and even during an awards ceremony a statement was made that the nominees “didn’t have to pretend that Harvey was attractive.” This behavior was known for decades, and yet no one said or reported anything to the police.

Why, you may ask? The answer is rather simple: Harvey Weinstein could make or break a career. So it all came down to play along and be successful (and potentially earn tons of money & fame), or find another career. It appears that at this point in time, 50+ starlets were accosted by Weinstein and kept quiet about it, and a good number of male stars & producers as well.

With this in mind, it isn’t too much of a stretch for many of these starlets to develop a negative attitude about men, especially powerful men. Consider the following:

Many of these women did not have anyone or anything to depend upon. By this time, they have bought into the independent female ideology of the feminist movement, and had no one to protect them or turn to. They also had a dream to be a star, and nothing else to fall back on except a menial job. This was the “make or break” moment of their lives. They became bitter.

Many of these women became supporters of Hillary Clinton (aka the Hildebeast, aka Felonia von Pantsuit) because they saw in her a strong woman who could stand toe-to-toe with the strong men of the world. When she lost to a powerful man who was caught on tape making a not-so-polite comment, they lost their collective minds – their projection was that a woman was stomped down by a crude misogynist.

So then they donned their pink p***y hats, stood up & made speeches, and generally went on a rampage against the President. It didn’t matter that the person that they should have been ranting against was the person that abused them. They were projecting their rage against someone who couldn’t hurt them.

During all this time, they were talking about being “brave” for speaking out against the President, calling him a misogynist and worse. They were being cowards – being brave is standing up for something and be willing to lose something for that action. Obviously, they weren’t willing to do that until someone else decided enough was enough, and then they became “brave” enough to pile on…when they felt safe enough that they didn’t have anything to fear or lose.

And what about the men in Hollywood? I’ve read a couple of articles of where the men knew what was going on, but declined to do anything about it. More “brave” people who only came out from the shadows when it was safe to do so without being squashed.

Here’s my bottom line:

The Hollywood elite have been standing up on their pedestals preaching about how they know best for us “normals” (a term used by Kurt Schlichter at Townhall.com to describe the people with common sense) on subjects ranging from morality to tolerance to global warming/climate change to firearms to victimhood of various types. After all, they are the stars and know better than anyone else because, well, they’re stars…

I’m calling a bulls**t penalty on Hollywood. They’re only stars because we like how they pretend to be other people. Otherwise, our “friends” in Tinseltown have lost all credibility with me (they didn’t have much before). For all their talk, they know nothing & have nothing but hypocrisy and bovine fertilizer.

Much like many politicians we happen to know, but that’s a post for another time…

Posted in Where is all this stupidity coming from? | Tagged | Leave a comment

May Thy Blade Chip and Shatter


The title of this post is from the 1984 movie “Dune,” and is what came to mind after reading the below.   This came from my wife’s Facebook feed, and while it is a long read, expresses the culture war we find ourselves in, and what President Trump is fighting. 

DO NOT KNOW WHO WROTE THIS. But, I agree with every word…

Trump’s lack of decorum, dignity, and statesmanship

My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum. They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.”

Here’s my answer:
We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency.

We tried statesmanship. Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized “collegiality” as John McCain?

We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney?

And the results were always the same. This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.

I don’t find anything “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper” about Barack Obama’s lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party. I don’t see anything “dignified” in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks. I don’t see anything “statesman-like” in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent. Yes, Obama was “articulate” and “polished” but in no way was he in the least bit “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper.”

The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the ‘60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale. It has been a war they’ve fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one – the violent take-over of the universities – till today. The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war.

While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety. With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America ’s first wartime president in the Culture War.

During wartime, things like “dignity” and “collegiality” simply aren’t the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming. Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today. Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”

General George Patton was a vulgar-talking, son-of-a-bitch. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum then, Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.

Trump is fighting. And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastards, I read your book!”

That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics. That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis. It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.

Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do. First, instead of going after “the fake media” — and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri — Trump isolated CNN. He made it personal.

Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as “the most powerful weapon of all.” … Most importantly, Trump’s tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. … They need to respond. This leaves them with only two choices. They can either “go high” (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery.

The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve.

It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive. Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama’s close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright’s church. Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration’s weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration’s cover-up.

So, to my friends on the Left — and the #NeverTrumpers as well — do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do. These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years. So, say anything you want about this president – I get it – he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights for America!

I wish nothing but the worst for the idealogy of our liberal leftest friends.  May they find their weapons turned against them, and thus the curse:

“May thy blade chip and shatter.”

Posted in Conservative Talk Blog host | 1 Comment

Here We Are Again


We at Wise Conservatism and Tom’s Place grieve at the loss of life inflicted upon the concertgoers by a madman.  Our prayers and sympathies go to all those affected by this tragedy.


Last Sunday night, a deranged person meticulously planned and carried out the worst mass shooting this country has ever seen.  The knee-jerk reactions are two-fold…

The first is “Why?”  To be honest, I doubt that we will ever know the full extent of why this person spent countless hours planning and thousands of dollars to rain terror upon innocent people.  As of the time of this post, little is known as this person left no note or trails to follow.  To the best of our knowledge, he was not prohibited from owning weapons, nor was he under psychiatric care.  He was a virtual unknown and not on any radar.  After a week of investigation, no one appears to be any closer to an answer.  Perhaps that is just as well as we do not need any other person to be influenced into copying this person’s despicable actions.

The second is the predictable “We need to ban guns and other gun stuff” mantra of those people who look for any reason at all to deny a person’s civil rights because of the actions of a criminal or madman.  I see this from the politicians and their surrogates who believe it is the government’s responsibility to keep the people safe.  First among the Liberal politicians was Felonia “What Difference Does It Make” von Pantsuit tweeting out that this isn’t the time to be political about guns and then proceeds to make it political.  Others followed suit while the bodies were still warm and the blood was still wet.

These people then proceed to denigrate legal gun owners and the NRA making statements like the gun lobby controls politics, gun owners should be jailed (or worse).  The truth of the matter is that the gun lobby spends far, far less on political contributions than Planned Parenthood, big business (like pharmaceutical companies), and other special interest groups.  Legal gun owners, especially those with concealed weapon permits, are not typically those that commit crimes

People that distort the facts and use tragedies like Las Vegas for political gain or power, in my opinion, are the lowest of the low, and have absolutely no moral compass or conscious.

The focus upon the weapons used are those that had a “bump stock” installed on them.  For those living under a rock, a bump stock is an accessory to a firearm that allows the user to use the recoil of the firearm to rapidly discharge the firearm, mimicking an automatic weapon.  It bears to note that under the Obama administration, a rabidly anti-gun administration, approved this device after not one, but two reviews.

The call for banning or regulating bump stocks is increasing.  The NRA (full disclosure: I am a Life Member) is calling for…

“…the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.”

Other organizations such as Gun Owners of America are against any additional regulations against devices like bump stocks citing the increasing slippery slope of increasing, onerous regulations eventually leading to banning firearms.  I, for one, am torn between the increased regulations upon legal gun owners, and the horror of another maniac acquiring this device and emulating the Las Vegas madman.

Let’s be very clear about something – criminals do not obey laws.  Madmen do not obey laws.  These people have made the decision to cause harm to others in order to fulfill some need.  Consider this statement by the NRA:

“Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks.”

Banning firearms will not cause a criminal from using an illegal or stolen firearm in a crime.  That has been established time and time again.  Consider this fact that doesn’t make it into the media or cited by gun-control/gun-banning fanatics:

Chicago has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the United States.  One would think that a gunless Utopia has been created, but that is far from reality.  Here’s reality:

atlas_SktWJ2GEZ@2x

Guns are still being used by criminals to kill and maim in the so-called gun free city called Chicago.  And this is while the citizenry has been essentially disarmed and are at the mercy of the criminals.

My question to the gun banners is this:  If heavily regulating or banning guns is the answer, then why aren’t places like Chicago gun violence free?

The Washington Post published an article that was originally researched at the data journalism site FiveThirtyEight.  The author, who states that she was originally for widespread gun control, came to a conclusion that she was not expecting.  The title of the article says it all for me – “I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise.”  Some of the bullet points are:

  • Two-thirds of gun deaths in the United States every year are suicides. Almost no proposed restriction would make it meaningfully harder for people with guns on hand to use them.
  • However, the next-largest set of gun deaths — 1 in 5 — were young men aged 15 to 34, killed in homicides. These men were most likely to die at the hands of other young men, often related to gang loyalties or other street violence.
  • And the last notable group of similar deaths was the 1,700 women murdered per year, usually as the result of domestic violence.

Therefore, suicides and gang violence account for the majority of the gun deaths in this country, not the mass shootings that capture the media’s lust for ratings points and the politicians quest for more power.  The real issues are mental health and law enforcement, not whether a gun is “good” or “evil” – that is how a gun, an inanimate object, is used.

With HIPA laws on the books guaranteeing patient confidentiality, and the extreme danger to law enforcement to disarm violent criminals, the politicians focus on the one group that they can exert their will – the law abiding gun owner.  They know that the law-abiding will obey the law, although they are starting to find out that the law-abiding have just about enough of the law-makers idiocy.

Every firearm regulation is an infringement upon the law-abiding citizen of this country.  They do absolutely nothing to deter the criminal from his activities.  If anyone thinks otherwise, let me remind you of something:

  • Murder is against the law, be it with a gun, a knife, a hammer, or bare hands.
  • Theft is against the law.
  • Assault and battery is against the law.

If everyone obeyed the laws, then there would be absolutely no crime.  None.  Columbine, Newtown, Ft. Hood, Las Vegas, and all the others would never have happened.  And we wouldn’t have to worry about someone coming into the house to attack, rob, or kill.

Quite frankly, I’m sick and tired of the gun banners and politicians harping about how guns are a plague upon this country, and that the killing must stop.  They quickly forget that law abiding people use guns to hunt and for self-defense from the same predators that would use guns to harm them.  And by the way, they also forget that the right to bear arms is as much a civil right as there is a right to free speech.

However, if these same people are really concerned about human life, then they should concentrate their efforts on the thousands of abortions performed each year upon helpless, innocent children.  That death toll is far, far greater than what any criminal or madman could inflict.

Posted in Gun Rights?, Where is all this stupidity coming from? | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Not For Long?


My computer (specifically Windows 10) and I have a love/hate relationship. I love it when it works, and hate it when it doesn’t or decides to go off into the wilderness without leaving so much as a goodbye note. After fighting off and on for more than a couple of months, I’m entering into the world of Linux. Hopefully, this will allow me to post content instead of throwing my hands up in frustration everytime I try to turn on the computer.

Speaking of frustration…

In the time that I’ve been somewhat sidelined, there have been many events that have happened in quick succession, and even if the computer had not been giving me problems, I could not have kept up with them as the developments of these events evolved quickly. Delays have been somewhat beneficial as 20/20 hindsight could be applied.

With that being stated, it’s off to the topic at hand (or at least the one currently burning red hot).

The NFL has a mess on it’s hands. It’s trying to cater to the players it depends on to provide entertainment to the masses, and appease the fans that it needs to keep the revenue flowing in. Never mind that what the Commissioner, owners, and coaches do at this point in time, the fans will see this as being too little too late. What started last year as a 2nd or 3rd string quarterback taking a knee during the National Anthem to support Black Lives Matter (BLM)has morphed into a multi-player multi-team protest during the opening ceremonies. The teams have somehow come up with the compromise of kneeling before the National Anthem, and then standing up for the Anthem, but I believe that the damage has been done – anything that the NFL comes up with will appear to be hollow and fake.

The blatant disrespect of the players for the Flag and the tolerance of that disrespect by the Commissioner by stating that the players had a First Amendment right to free speech doesn’t wash with me. If those rights were so important, then why are players fined for praying in the end zone after a touchdown, or pretending to urinate on the opposing team? The hypocrisy is overwhelming.

The fans tune in to see a football game and escape the politics of the day for a little while. Instead, they are treated to a view of disrespect to the Flag of the Country that provided these people the opportunity to play a game for money (and often good money at that). Worse, many of the fans are Veterans or families of Veterans, and they do not take disrespect of the Flag lightly. Nor do many of the fans who are police officers and their families approve of the player’s support of BLM, who constantly call for the assault and killing of police officers. Last of all are the fans who are Patriots – those who love this country and all it has to offer – who do not appreciate the appearance of overpaid athletes bringing controversial politics to the field.

Perhaps that is to be expected. The NFL should probably be called the National Felon’s League due to the facts that many of the players have serious records for actions off the field. However, due to them being elite athletes, many are give what is essentially a slap on the wrist. For instance:

NFL arrested

And the above is only a sampling of the crimes that NFL players have been involved in. What is not shown are multiple instances of domestic abuse and even murder.

I mentioned earlier that the damage has been done to the NFL. I have seen multiple YouTube videos of fans burning season tickets, jerseys, and other NFL merchandise vowing to never set foot in a stadium or watch another game. Ticket sales are down 20% for the regular games, and apparel sales are down as well. I, for one, will not watch any games this year including the Superbowl.

Quite frankly, if this continues, NFL will soon stand for “Not For Long.”

Posted in Political, Where is all this stupidity coming from? | 2 Comments

September 11, 2001


Another year has gone by, and it seems that no one, outside of a few television specials, seems to understand the significance of when foreign terrorism came to the United States.  The calls of the politicians and leaders of that day to “Never Forget!!” have largely been forgotten or minimized.

Today, it’s been sixteen years since the attacks that ended the lives of almost 3,000 people, affected millions more, and continues to impact our lives today.  Legislation (the civil rights violating Patriot Act), mindless & endless regulations, and the creation of two more governmental agencies (Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA)) affect our lives as Citizens of this country in ways that would have been unthinkable twenty years ago.

In the wave of current day terrorists and politicians to wipe out the history of this country, we should take time to look back and see what has happened, and read not what has been curated and edited beyond recognition, but to contemplate the human side of this event.  For that, please read the following posts:

Remembering 9/11 is a post that I wrote on the five-year anniversary.  These were my thoughts of the events and implications of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Remembering 9/11 – A Tribute was written as part of Project 2996 to remember the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Be well, my friends.

Posted in National Security Concerns | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Our Fellow Man


The following showed up in my personal Facebook feed, and it states very eloquently what the deplorables do when their fellow person needs help.

Cajan Navy

Let this sink in for a minute…..Hundreds and hundreds of small boats pulled by countless pickups and SUVs from across the South are headed for Houston. Almost all of them driven by men. They’re using their own property, sacrificing their own time, spending their own money, and risking their own lives for one reason: to help total strangers in desperate need.

Most of them are by themselves. Most are dressed like the redneck duck hunters and bass fisherman they are. Many are veterans. Most are wearing well-used gimme-hats, t-shirts, and jeans; and there’s a preponderance of camo. Most are probably gun owners, and most probably voted for Trump.

These are the people the Left loves to hate, the ones Maddow mocks. The ones Maher and Olbermann just *know* they’re so much better than.

These are The Quiet Ones. They don’t wear masks and tear down statues. They don’t, as a rule, march and demonstrate. And most have probably never been in a Whole Foods.

But they’ll spend the next several days wading in cold, dirty water; dodging gators and water moccasins and fire ants; eating whatever meager rations are available; and sleeping wherever they can in dirty, damp clothes. Their reward is the tears and the hugs and the smiles from the terrified people they help. They’ll deliver one boatload, and then go back for more.

When disaster strikes, it’s what men do. Real men. Heroic men. American men. And then they’ll knock back a few shots, or a few beers with like-minded men they’ve never met before, and talk about fish, or ten-point bucks, or the benefits of hollow-point ammo, or their F-150.

And the next time they hear someone talk about “the patriarchy”, or “male privilege”, they’ll snort, turn off the TV and go to bed.

In the meantime, they’ll likely be up again before dawn. To do it again. Until the helpless are rescued. And the work’s done.

They’re unlikely to be reimbursed. There won’t be medals. They won’t care. They’re heroes. And it’s what they do.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

What is a Right?


With so many people demanding their “rights” I thought it would be prudent to post something that I found a couple of years ago.  From LinkAmerica:

A right is the sovereignty to act without the permission of others.  The concept of a right carries with it an implicit, un-stated footnote: you may exercise your rights as long as you do not violate the same rights of another—within this context, rights are an absolute.

A right is universal—meaning: it applies to all men, not just to a few.   There is no such thing as a “right” for one man, or a group of men, that is not possessed by all.  This means there are no special “rights” unique to women or men, blacks or white, the elderly or the young, homosexuals or heterosexuals, the rich or the poor, doctors or patients or any other group. 

A right must be exercised through your own initiative and action.  It is not a claim on others.  A right is not actualized and implemented by the actions of others.  This means you do not have the right to the time in another person’s life.  You do not have a right to other peoples money.  You do not have the right to another person’s property.  If you wish to acquire some money from another person, you must earn it—then you have a right to it.  If you wish to gain some benefit from the time of another person’s life, you must gain it through the voluntary cooperation of that individual—not through coercion.  If you wish to possess some item of property of another individual, you must buy it on terms acceptable to the owner—not gain it through theft.

Alone in a wilderness, the concept of a right would never occur to you, even though in such isolation you have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  In this solitude, you would be free to take the actions needed to sustain your life: hunt for food, grow crops, build a shelter and so on.  If a hundred new settlers suddenly arrive in your area and establish a community, you do not gain any additional rights by living in such a society nor do you lose any; you simply retain the same rights you possessed when you were alone.

A right defines what you may do without the permission of those other men and it erects a moral and legal barrier across which they may not cross.  It is your protection against those who attempt to forcibly take some of your life’s time, your money or property.

Animals do not have rights.  Rights only apply to beings capable of thought, capable of defining rights and creating an organized means—government—of protecting such rights.  Thus, a fly or mosquito does not possess rights of any kind, including the right to life.  You may swat a fly or mosquito, killing them both.  You do not have the right to do the same to another human being, except in self-defense.  You may own and raise cows, keep them in captivity and milk them for all they are worth.  You do not have the right to do the same to other men, although that is what statists effectively do to you. 

There is only one, fundamental right, the right to life—which is: the sovereignty to follow your own judgment, without anyone’s permission, about the actions in your life.  All other rights are applications of this right to specific contexts, such as property and freedom of speech.

The right to property is the right to take the action needed to create and/or earn the material means needed for living.  Once you have earned it, then that particular property is yours—which means: you have the right to control the use and disposal of that property.  It may not be taken from you or used by others without your permission.

Freedom of speech is the right to say anything you wish, using any medium of communication you can afford.  It is not the responsibility of others to pay for some means of expression or to provide you with a platform on which to speak.  If a newspaper or television station refuses to allow you to express your views utilizing their property, your right to freedom of speech has not been violated and this is not censorship.  Censorship is a concept that only applies to government action, the action of forcibly forbidding and/or punishing the expression of certain ideas.

Statists have corrupted the actual meaning of a right and have converted it, in the minds of most, into its opposite: into a claim on the life of another.  With the growth of statism, over the past few decades, we have seen an explosion of these “rights”—which, in fact, have gradually eroded your actual right to your life, money and property.

Statists declare you have a “right” to housing, to a job, to health care, to an education, to a minimum wage, to preferential treatment if you are a minority and so on.  These “rights” are all a claim, a lien, on your life and the lives of others.  These “rights” impose a form of involuntary servitude on you and others.  These “rights” force you to pay for someone’s housing, their health care, their education, for training for a job—and, it forces others to provide special treatment for certain groups and to pay higher-than-necessary wages. 

Under statism, “rights” are a means of enslavement: it places a mortgage on your life—and statists are the mortgage holders, on the receiving end of unearned payments forcibly extracted from your life and your earnings.  You do not have a right to your life, others do.  Others do not have a right to their lives, either, but you have a “right” to theirs.  Such a concept of “rights” forcibly hog-ties everyone to everyone else, making everyone a slave to everyone else—except for those masters, statist politicians, who pull the strings and crack the whips.

Actual rights—those actions to which you are entitled by your nature as man—give you clear title to your life.  A right is your declaration of independence.  A statist “right” is their declaration of your dependence on others and other’s dependence on you.  Until these bogus “rights” are repudiated, your freedom to live your life as you see fit will continue to slowly disappear.

Posted in Where is all this stupidity coming from? | Tagged | Leave a comment